Police: Man killed in home by Aurora PD Monday morning had fatally shot intruder minutes earlier

[2aguy]

And what does all these guns get us?

Here’s the deal Lucile, if you banned guns you would only be disarming the law abiding citizens and emboldening the criminals. Carnage would ensue.

We already have carnage suzie. We have so many armed criminals, because there is guns everywhere. Crime has not gone down with concealed carry, it has just ensured more criminals carry also.

Criminals will carry regardless of concealed carry laws you idiot

Knowing that victims may be armed is quite an incentive for criminals themselves to be armed. And that's what we have seen, hence why violent crime has increased with more carry.

So let me get this straight

you think disarming law abiding citizens will encourage criminals to disarm?

What the **** are you smoking?

They did this in Britain..... their violent crime rate is skyrocketing and their gun crime rate is up 44% last year in London....

 

[Skull Pilot]

Well...since Americans use their guns 2.5 million times a year to stop rape, robbery and murder....that would be 2.5 million fewer Americans who have had their lives destroyed by criminals released into society by democrats...

Oh, and a lower gun murder rate, a lower gun crime rate and a lower violent crime rate..

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 17 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Yes it declined after Bill Clinton passed some gun control. You can thank background checks.

No....bill clinton locked up violent criminals because they had to...they passed 3 strikes your out laws and locked up violent criminals...

And you have to sneak past the fact that as the crime rate dropped, more Americans were buying and carrying guns...showing that our entire argument that more guns mean more crime is a lie.....it is not based in truth, facts or reality.

1993 we got background checks. Crime went down right after. Thank you gun control!

Criminals don't do background checks..... you really need to put down the bottle and the pills and get help.

Our homicide rate is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control. I don't understand how you can sleep at night pushing so much death.

FYI the homicide rate in the UK has always been lower than the US even before all their gun control and all the gun control in the UK has not dropped their murder rate to lower than what it was before all their gun control

There are many more variables than guns that contribute to a country's murder rate

 

[Skull Pilot]

More lives would have been saved if all he had was a derringer obviously.

Our homicide rates is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control.

London's murder rate surpasses New York's for 1st time ever

Yes NYC has very strong gun control. Our murder rate would go down if the country had the same laws as NYC.

UK has one of the strictest gun control laws in the world.

Gun control and ownership laws

Canada has all the gun control that our gun grabbers want...and their gun crime rate is going up too....thanks to immigration.

Homicide rates:
US: 5.35
Canada: 1.68

Move to Canada

 

[Skull Pilot]

And you have been beaten on this one over and over.

The man attacked from an ambush with surprise..... he was quickly cornered and contained...

What you don't want to talk about is that there were dozens of armed citizens in that march. Many had AR-15 rifles on their shoulders during that march and when the attack happened, the police did not shoot them, they did not shoot the police, the armed citizens moved out of the way and let the Black Lives Matter shooter be dealt with by the police..

So you just negated your original post..... a mass public shooting, with dozens of armed citizens, many with AR-15 rifles, and no law abiding gun owner was shot by mistake.....

He killed 5 armed officers and injured 9 other armed officers. Yes the victims were all very ARMED.

And all the open carry guys at that march ran screaming like little girls.

Wow...the stupid is strong with you...... those armed citizens showed that you guys don't know what you are talking about...they did not react the way you said they would react, taking the law in their own hands, getting in the way, getting shot by police, shooting police...

They saw the attack, and got out of the way and let the police do their jobs.... they did exactly as we keep telling you they would do..... and you now have to try to spin it to keep your lie going.

WASTED BREATH, 2a. People who are anti-gun are so mainly for one reason: guns SCARE THEM because they know they'd be dangerous in THEIR hands.

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

 

[Dana7360]

AURORA, Colo. – Police confirmed Monday afternoon that the man they shot and killed early Monday morning is believed to have shot and killed another man who had broken into his home minutes earlier.

“Officers arrived to a very chaotic and violent scene,” Aurora Police Chief Nick Metz wrote in a news release issued Monday afternoon.

Metz said officers who arrived at the scene heard gunshots inside the home and ran into an armed man. An officer shot the man, who died at an area hospital.

After clearing the scene, according to Metz, officers found a juvenile injured inside and a man shot dead on the bathroom floor. The child was taken to a hospital for “serious, but non-life-threatening injuries” caused by the intruder, he said.

Both men’s identities will be released by the Adams County Coroner’s Office, Metz said. The officer who shot the resident of the home is on standard paid administrative leave.

Police: Man killed in home by Aurora PD Monday morning had fatally shot intruder minutes earlier

A sad incident. But it really shows what happens when too many people are armed. Imagine police responding to a mass shooting with lots of armed individuals.

There are 600 million guns in private hands. 17 million people carry guns for self defense.

According to the CDC 2.4 million times a year Americans use their guns to stop rape, robbery and murder.

According to the Department of Justice, they believe that number is 1.5 million times a year.

And you found one case where the confusion results in a death...

And you think that is an intelligent post?

One example of many. Please link the studies you claim exist.

If there is so much defending going on, why is our homicide rate 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control?

Because if those people didn't have their legal guns to stop those rapes, robberies and murders our violent crime rate would be higher than Britains....Britains violent crime rate is higher than ours after they banned and confiscated guns......

Do you want 2.4 million more women raped, more robberies and more murders?

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)

CDC...1996-1998... 2.46 million each of those years.( no cops, no military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

The CDC and Dept of Justice never did studies. Stop the lies or link to them.

The republicans cut off all the money in the 90s for the CDC to do that research. So there's no way that the CDC can have any info on gun violence.

According to the article at the link below the funding for the CDC to research gun violence is at zero.

Republicans Say No to CDC Gun Violence Research — ProPublica

Quietly, Congress extends a ban on CDC research on gun violence

 

[Skull Pilot]

Here’s the deal Lucile, if you banned guns you would only be disarming the law abiding citizens and emboldening the criminals. Carnage would ensue.

We already have carnage suzie. We have so many armed criminals, because there is guns everywhere. Crime has not gone down with concealed carry, it has just ensured more criminals carry also.

Criminals will carry regardless of concealed carry laws you idiot

Knowing that victims may be armed is quite an incentive for criminals themselves to be armed. And that's what we have seen, hence why violent crime has increased with more carry.

So let me get this straight

you think disarming law abiding citizens will encourage criminals to disarm?

What the **** are you smoking?

They did this in Britain..... their violent crime rate is skyrocketing and their gun crime rate is up 44% last year in London....

Don't those criminals know that if their potential victims are unarmed that they too should lay down their weapons?

 

[Dana7360]

There are 600 million guns in private hands. 17 million people carry guns for self defense.

According to the CDC 2.4 million times a year Americans use their guns to stop rape, robbery and murder.

According to the Department of Justice, they believe that number is 1.5 million times a year.

And you found one case where the confusion results in a death...

And you think that is an intelligent post?

One example of many. Please link the studies you claim exist.

If there is so much defending going on, why is our homicide rate 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control?

Because if those people didn't have their legal guns to stop those rapes, robberies and murders our violent crime rate would be higher than Britains....Britains violent crime rate is higher than ours after they banned and confiscated guns......

Do you want 2.4 million more women raped, more robberies and more murders?

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)

CDC...1996-1998... 2.46 million each of those years.( no cops, no military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

The CDC and Dept of Justice never did studies. Stop the lies or link to them.

Here...the CDC studied gun self defense 3 years in a row........

SSRN Electronic Library

The timing of CDC’s addition of a DGU question to the BRFSS is of some interest. Prior to 1996, the BRFSS had never included a question about DGU. Kleck and Gertz (1995) conducted their survey in February through April 1993, presented their estimate that there were over 2 million DGUs in 1992 at the annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology in November 1994, and published it in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology in the Fall of 1995. CDC added a DGU question to the BRFSS the very first year they could do so after that 1995 publication, in the 1996 edition. CDC was not the only federal agency during the Clinton administration to field a survey addressing the prevalence of DGU at that particular time. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) financed a national survey devoting even more detailed attention to estimating DGU prevalence, which was fielded in November and December 1994, just months after preliminary results of the 1993 Kleck/Gertz survey became known. Neither CDC nor NIJ had ever financed research into DGU before 1996. Perhaps there was just “something in the air” that motivated the two agencies to suddenly decide in 1994 to address the topic. Another interpretation, however, is that fielding of the surveys was triggered by the Kleck/Gertz findings that DGU was common, and that these agencies hoped to obtain lower DGU prevalence estimates than those obtained by Kleck/Gertz. Low estimates would have implied fewer beneficial uses of firearms, results that would have been far more congenial to the strongly pro-control positions of the Clinton administration.

CDC, in Surveys It Never Bothered Making Public, Provides More Evidence That Plenty of Americans Innocently Defend Themselves with Guns



Kleck's new paper—"What Do CDC's Surveys Say About the Frequency of Defensive Gun Uses?"—finds that the agency had asked about DGUs in its Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 1996, 1997, and 1998.

Those polls, Kleck writes,

are high-quality telephone surveys of enormous probability samples of U.S. adults, asking about a wide range of health-related topics. Those that addressed DGU asked more people about this topic than any other surveys conducted before or since. For example, the 1996 survey asked the DGU question of 5,484 people. The next-largest number questioned about DGU was 4,977 by Kleck and Gertz (1995), and sample sizes were much smaller in all the rest of surveys on the topic (Kleck 2001).

Kleck was impressed with how well the survey worded its question: "During the last 12 months, have you confronted another person with a firearm, even if you did not fire it, to protect yourself, your property, or someone else?" Respondents were told to leave out incidents from occupations, like policing, where using firearms is part of the job. Kleck is impressed with how the question excludes animals but includes DGUs outside the home as well as within it.

Kleck is less impressed with the fact that the question was only asked of people who admitted to owning guns in their home earlier in the survey, and that they asked no follow-up questions regarding the specific nature of the DGU incident.

From Kleck's own surveys, he found that only 79 percent of those who reported a DGU "had also reported a gun in their household at the time of the interview," so he thinks whatever numbers the CDC found need to be revised upward to account for that. (Kleck speculates that CDC showed a sudden interest in the question of DGUs starting in 1996 because Kleck's own famous/notorious survey had been published in 1995.)

At any rate, Kleck downloaded the datasets for those three years and found that the "weighted percent who reported a DGU...was 1.3% in 1996, 0.9% in 1997, 1.0% in 1998, and 1.07% in all three surveys combined."





Kleck figures if you do the adjustment upward he thinks necessary for those who had DGU incidents without personally owning a gun in the home at the time of the survey, and then the adjustment downward he thinks necessary because CDC didn't do detailed follow-ups to confirm the nature of the incident, you get 1.24 percent, a close match to his own 1.326 percent figure.

He concludes that the small difference between his estimate and the CDC's "can be attributed to declining rates of violent crime, which accounts for most DGUs. With fewer occasions for self-defense in the form of violent victimizations, one would expect fewer DGUs."

Kleck further details how much these CDC surveys confirmed his own controversial work:

The final adjusted prevalence of 1.24% therefore implies that in an average year during 1996–1998, 2.46 million U.S. adults used a gun for self-defense.



This estimate, based on an enormous sample of 12,870 cases (unweighted) in a nationally representative sample, strongly confirms the 2.5 million past-12-months estimate obtained Kleck and Gertz (1995)....CDC's results, then, imply that guns were used defensively by victims about 3.6 times as often as they were used offensively by criminals.

Kleck did the study, and he did the numbers wrong again. So no, the CDC did not do a study. If you are posting, you are lying. Sad.

The CDC can't do any study on gun violence. The republicans took the money away for that in the 90s.

The person you're replying to is lying.

 

[Skull Pilot]

One example of many. Please link the studies you claim exist.

If there is so much defending going on, why is our homicide rate 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control?

Because if those people didn't have their legal guns to stop those rapes, robberies and murders our violent crime rate would be higher than Britains....Britains violent crime rate is higher than ours after they banned and confiscated guns......

Do you want 2.4 million more women raped, more robberies and more murders?

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)

CDC...1996-1998... 2.46 million each of those years.( no cops, no military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


-------------------------------------------

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

The CDC and Dept of Justice never did studies. Stop the lies or link to them.

Here...the CDC studied gun self defense 3 years in a row........

SSRN Electronic Library

The timing of CDC’s addition of a DGU question to the BRFSS is of some interest. Prior to 1996, the BRFSS had never included a question about DGU. Kleck and Gertz (1995) conducted their survey in February through April 1993, presented their estimate that there were over 2 million DGUs in 1992 at the annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology in November 1994, and published it in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology in the Fall of 1995. CDC added a DGU question to the BRFSS the very first year they could do so after that 1995 publication, in the 1996 edition. CDC was not the only federal agency during the Clinton administration to field a survey addressing the prevalence of DGU at that particular time. The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) financed a national survey devoting even more detailed attention to estimating DGU prevalence, which was fielded in November and December 1994, just months after preliminary results of the 1993 Kleck/Gertz survey became known. Neither CDC nor NIJ had ever financed research into DGU before 1996. Perhaps there was just “something in the air” that motivated the two agencies to suddenly decide in 1994 to address the topic. Another interpretation, however, is that fielding of the surveys was triggered by the Kleck/Gertz findings that DGU was common, and that these agencies hoped to obtain lower DGU prevalence estimates than those obtained by Kleck/Gertz. Low estimates would have implied fewer beneficial uses of firearms, results that would have been far more congenial to the strongly pro-control positions of the Clinton administration.

CDC, in Surveys It Never Bothered Making Public, Provides More Evidence That Plenty of Americans Innocently Defend Themselves with Guns



Kleck's new paper—"What Do CDC's Surveys Say About the Frequency of Defensive Gun Uses?"—finds that the agency had asked about DGUs in its Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 1996, 1997, and 1998.

Those polls, Kleck writes,

are high-quality telephone surveys of enormous probability samples of U.S. adults, asking about a wide range of health-related topics. Those that addressed DGU asked more people about this topic than any other surveys conducted before or since. For example, the 1996 survey asked the DGU question of 5,484 people. The next-largest number questioned about DGU was 4,977 by Kleck and Gertz (1995), and sample sizes were much smaller in all the rest of surveys on the topic (Kleck 2001).

Kleck was impressed with how well the survey worded its question: "During the last 12 months, have you confronted another person with a firearm, even if you did not fire it, to protect yourself, your property, or someone else?" Respondents were told to leave out incidents from occupations, like policing, where using firearms is part of the job. Kleck is impressed with how the question excludes animals but includes DGUs outside the home as well as within it.

Kleck is less impressed with the fact that the question was only asked of people who admitted to owning guns in their home earlier in the survey, and that they asked no follow-up questions regarding the specific nature of the DGU incident.

From Kleck's own surveys, he found that only 79 percent of those who reported a DGU "had also reported a gun in their household at the time of the interview," so he thinks whatever numbers the CDC found need to be revised upward to account for that. (Kleck speculates that CDC showed a sudden interest in the question of DGUs starting in 1996 because Kleck's own famous/notorious survey had been published in 1995.)

At any rate, Kleck downloaded the datasets for those three years and found that the "weighted percent who reported a DGU...was 1.3% in 1996, 0.9% in 1997, 1.0% in 1998, and 1.07% in all three surveys combined."





Kleck figures if you do the adjustment upward he thinks necessary for those who had DGU incidents without personally owning a gun in the home at the time of the survey, and then the adjustment downward he thinks necessary because CDC didn't do detailed follow-ups to confirm the nature of the incident, you get 1.24 percent, a close match to his own 1.326 percent figure.

He concludes that the small difference between his estimate and the CDC's "can be attributed to declining rates of violent crime, which accounts for most DGUs. With fewer occasions for self-defense in the form of violent victimizations, one would expect fewer DGUs."

Kleck further details how much these CDC surveys confirmed his own controversial work:

The final adjusted prevalence of 1.24% therefore implies that in an average year during 1996–1998, 2.46 million U.S. adults used a gun for self-defense.



This estimate, based on an enormous sample of 12,870 cases (unweighted) in a nationally representative sample, strongly confirms the 2.5 million past-12-months estimate obtained Kleck and Gertz (1995)....CDC's results, then, imply that guns were used defensively by victims about 3.6 times as often as they were used offensively by criminals.

Kleck did the study, and he did the numbers wrong again. So no, the CDC did not do a study. If you are posting, you are lying. Sad.

The CDC can't do any study on gun violence. The republicans took the money away for that in the 90s.

The person you're replying to is lying.

Educate yourself

The Dickey amendment did not prohibit any type of research by the CDC it only stated that funds for CDC research cannot be used to promote gun control

CDC isn’t banned from studying gun violence; it’s just too scared to do its job | News | Dallas News

 

[toobfreak]

He killed 5 armed officers and injured 9 other armed officers. Yes the victims were all very ARMED.

And all the open carry guys at that march ran screaming like little girls.

Wow...the stupid is strong with you...... those armed citizens showed that you guys don't know what you are talking about...they did not react the way you said they would react, taking the law in their own hands, getting in the way, getting shot by police, shooting police...

They saw the attack, and got out of the way and let the police do their jobs.... they did exactly as we keep telling you they would do..... and you now have to try to spin it to keep your lie going.

WASTED BREATH, 2a. People who are anti-gun are so mainly for one reason: guns SCARE THEM because they know they'd be dangerous in THEIR hands.

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

The arguments of the brainless buffoon all melt by the wayside once people look at the actual data:

Clearly, the problem ISN'T the guns but who gets to use them. What works in other countries, be it traffic, food or firearms has NO RELEVANCY on what works for America!

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

A sad incident. But it really shows what happens when too many people are armed. Imagine police responding to a mass shooting with lots of armed individuals.

So what you're saying is we can't trust the police to protect us.

Glad to see you've come around.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And all the open carry guys at that march ran screaming like little girls.

Wow...the stupid is strong with you...... those armed citizens showed that you guys don't know what you are talking about...they did not react the way you said they would react, taking the law in their own hands, getting in the way, getting shot by police, shooting police...

They saw the attack, and got out of the way and let the police do their jobs.... they did exactly as we keep telling you they would do..... and you now have to try to spin it to keep your lie going.

WASTED BREATH, 2a. People who are anti-gun are so mainly for one reason: guns SCARE THEM because they know they'd be dangerous in THEIR hands.

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

The arguments of the brainless buffoon all melt by the wayside once people look at the actual data:

View attachment 207950 View attachment 207951
Clearly, the problem ISN'T the guns but who gets to use them. What works in other countries, be it traffic, food or firearms has NO RELEVANCY on what works for America!

I've been telling these morons the same thing

Our murder rate is not driven by gun ownership.
The violence that drives the murder rate has its roots in generational poverty seen in the inner cities.

Inner-City Violence in the Age of Mass Incarceration

 

[BigTruck]

AURORA, Colo. – Police confirmed Monday afternoon that the man they shot and killed early Monday morning is believed to have shot and killed another man who had broken into his home minutes earlier.

“Officers arrived to a very chaotic and violent scene,” Aurora Police Chief Nick Metz wrote in a news release issued Monday afternoon.

Metz said officers who arrived at the scene heard gunshots inside the home and ran into an armed man. An officer shot the man, who died at an area hospital.

After clearing the scene, according to Metz, officers found a juvenile injured inside and a man shot dead on the bathroom floor. The child was taken to a hospital for “serious, but non-life-threatening injuries” caused by the intruder, he said.

Both men’s identities will be released by the Adams County Coroner’s Office, Metz said. The officer who shot the resident of the home is on standard paid administrative leave.

Police: Man killed in home by Aurora PD Monday morning had fatally shot intruder minutes earlier

A sad incident. But it really shows what happens when too many people are armed. Imagine police responding to a mass shooting with lots of armed individuals.

Sooooo...what you are saying is this...


The law abiding gun owner managed to effectively use their gun to stop a home invader. They called the police, while the situation was under control....

The police showed up, lost control and killed the innocent man. So where exactly is this the problem of a law abiding gun owner who actually used his gun responsibly...while the police fucked up?

Your thread actually shows that of the two, the police should lose their guns, not the law abiding gun owner.

Our police are very quick to shoot people because they are themselves often shot. These things don't happen where there is strong gun control. Police rarely are shot and rarely shoot people in countries with strong gun control.

You either believe in freedom or you don’t. Freedom isn’t security from bad things happening, it security from the tyranny of government.

I’d bet dollars to donuts that those other countries you speak of have better border security. The left here in the U.S. screams racism and xenophobia any time someone suggests increasing border security.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

He killed 5 armed officers and injured 9 other armed officers. Yes the victims were all very ARMED.

And all the open carry guys at that march ran screaming like little girls.

Wow...the stupid is strong with you...... those armed citizens showed that you guys don't know what you are talking about...they did not react the way you said they would react, taking the law in their own hands, getting in the way, getting shot by police, shooting police...

They saw the attack, and got out of the way and let the police do their jobs.... they did exactly as we keep telling you they would do..... and you now have to try to spin it to keep your lie going.

WASTED BREATH, 2a. People who are anti-gun are so mainly for one reason: guns SCARE THEM because they know they'd be dangerous in THEIR hands.

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

Very easy answer and you know it. The lower population centers have fewer people therefore, less crime. The higher the concentration of population the higher rate of crime. Simple as that. The lower population centers will, then, require the lower run regulations while the higher population centers will require the higher gun regulations. If you put the higher concentrated population centers to the same lax gun regulation as the low population centers, it would be a friggin blood bath. But you conveniently leave that out. This is why the States will vary in their laws and the inner cities will tighten those laws up to suit their needs. You can spout all this BS if you want but that's the actual answer. Are you sure you aren't part of the new Russian Supported Attacks coming into the US these days they are finding all over the place trying to cause more discord in the US?

 

[Skull Pilot]

And all the open carry guys at that march ran screaming like little girls.

Wow...the stupid is strong with you...... those armed citizens showed that you guys don't know what you are talking about...they did not react the way you said they would react, taking the law in their own hands, getting in the way, getting shot by police, shooting police...

They saw the attack, and got out of the way and let the police do their jobs.... they did exactly as we keep telling you they would do..... and you now have to try to spin it to keep your lie going.

WASTED BREATH, 2a. People who are anti-gun are so mainly for one reason: guns SCARE THEM because they know they'd be dangerous in THEIR hands.

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

Very easy answer and you know it. The lower population centers have fewer people therefore, less crime. The higher the concentration of population the higher rate of crime. Simple as that. The lower population centers will, then, require the lower run regulations while the higher population centers will require the higher gun regulations. If you put the higher concentrated population centers to the same lax gun regulation as the low population centers, it would be a friggin blood bath. But you conveniently leave that out. This is why the States will vary in their laws and the inner cities will tighten those laws up to suit their needs. You can spout all this BS if you want but that's the actual answer. Are you sure you aren't part of the new Russian Supported Attacks coming into the US these days they are finding all over the place trying to cause more discord in the US?

You do not understand ratios do you?

It matters not the population when you use crimes per 100,00 as in the murder rate in NH is 1 per 100000 and that of CA is more than 4 per 100,000

You don't understand that a high population center can have more crimes in total but a lower CRIME RATE than a low population density area do you?

 

[2aguy]

And all the open carry guys at that march ran screaming like little girls.

Wow...the stupid is strong with you...... those armed citizens showed that you guys don't know what you are talking about...they did not react the way you said they would react, taking the law in their own hands, getting in the way, getting shot by police, shooting police...

They saw the attack, and got out of the way and let the police do their jobs.... they did exactly as we keep telling you they would do..... and you now have to try to spin it to keep your lie going.

WASTED BREATH, 2a. People who are anti-gun are so mainly for one reason: guns SCARE THEM because they know they'd be dangerous in THEIR hands.

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

Very easy answer and you know it. The lower population centers have fewer people therefore, less crime. The higher the concentration of population the higher rate of crime. Simple as that. The lower population centers will, then, require the lower run regulations while the higher population centers will require the higher gun regulations. If you put the higher concentrated population centers to the same lax gun regulation as the low population centers, it would be a friggin blood bath. But you conveniently leave that out. This is why the States will vary in their laws and the inner cities will tighten those laws up to suit their needs. You can spout all this BS if you want but that's the actual answer. Are you sure you aren't part of the new Russian Supported Attacks coming into the US these days they are finding all over the place trying to cause more discord in the US?

Wrong....if that were the case a small city like Baltimore would not have more gun murder than New York City.... it is tiny compared to New York and it has a higher gun murder number...

Notice..... it has a higher gun murder number than L.A. with a vastly larger number of people. Also, Houston.....more people, more guns, in a state with a border on the Narco state of Mexico, and a lower gun murder number.....

You don't know what you are a talking about. It all depends on the criminals in the democrat controlled city and how the police are allowed to arrest them. And as more people are able to carry guns and own guns that helps too.....as Houston shows compared to the other cities on that list...

Murder rate 2017
Baltimore......343
population......620,961
Population of cities 2016:

Chicago........2.7 million
L.A................3.9 million
N.Y................8.5 million
Houston........2.3 million
Baltimore......620,961
Detroit...........672,795
Milwaukee.....595,647

St. Louis.......311,404

Murder rate 2016:

Chicago........765
L.A.......... .....293
N.Y................335
Houston .......301
Baltimore......318
Detroit...........303
Milwaukee.... 142
St. Louis..........188

 

[2aguy]

Wow...the stupid is strong with you...... those armed citizens showed that you guys don't know what you are talking about...they did not react the way you said they would react, taking the law in their own hands, getting in the way, getting shot by police, shooting police...

They saw the attack, and got out of the way and let the police do their jobs.... they did exactly as we keep telling you they would do..... and you now have to try to spin it to keep your lie going.

WASTED BREATH, 2a. People who are anti-gun are so mainly for one reason: guns SCARE THEM because they know they'd be dangerous in THEIR hands.

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

The arguments of the brainless buffoon all melt by the wayside once people look at the actual data:

View attachment 207950 View attachment 207951
Clearly, the problem ISN'T the guns but who gets to use them. What works in other countries, be it traffic, food or firearms has NO RELEVANCY on what works for America!

I've been telling these morons the same thing

Our murder rate is not driven by gun ownership.
The violence that drives the murder rate has its roots in generational poverty seen in the inner cities.

Inner-City Violence in the Age of Mass Incarceration

And to narrow it down.... generations of single teenage mothers raising young males without fathers..... that is the key.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Wow...the stupid is strong with you...... those armed citizens showed that you guys don't know what you are talking about...they did not react the way you said they would react, taking the law in their own hands, getting in the way, getting shot by police, shooting police...

They saw the attack, and got out of the way and let the police do their jobs.... they did exactly as we keep telling you they would do..... and you now have to try to spin it to keep your lie going.

WASTED BREATH, 2a. People who are anti-gun are so mainly for one reason: guns SCARE THEM because they know they'd be dangerous in THEIR hands.

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

Very easy answer and you know it. The lower population centers have fewer people therefore, less crime. The higher the concentration of population the higher rate of crime. Simple as that. The lower population centers will, then, require the lower run regulations while the higher population centers will require the higher gun regulations. If you put the higher concentrated population centers to the same lax gun regulation as the low population centers, it would be a friggin blood bath. But you conveniently leave that out. This is why the States will vary in their laws and the inner cities will tighten those laws up to suit their needs. You can spout all this BS if you want but that's the actual answer. Are you sure you aren't part of the new Russian Supported Attacks coming into the US these days they are finding all over the place trying to cause more discord in the US?

You do not understand ratios do you?

It matters not the population when you use crimes per 100,00 as in the murder rate in NH is 1 per 100000 and that of CA is more than 4 per 100,000

You don't understand that a high population center can have more crimes in total but a lower CRIME RATE than a low population density area do you?

Oh I understand the problem quite well. What I don't understand is why you keep spreading this BS over and over. Since you are so prolific about it, someone must be paying you to do it. Now we must figure out the reason for it. Could it be the NRA to sell more guns through fear? Or could it be the Russians to keep the American Public fighting among itself. We already know the Russian Propaganda has infiltrated the NRA and much of the Corporate Businesses already. So it just might be both. You could be quoting the NRA or a Corporation when in reality,, you are quoting the Russians. I suspect the worst with your prolific posting.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Wow...the stupid is strong with you...... those armed citizens showed that you guys don't know what you are talking about...they did not react the way you said they would react, taking the law in their own hands, getting in the way, getting shot by police, shooting police...

They saw the attack, and got out of the way and let the police do their jobs.... they did exactly as we keep telling you they would do..... and you now have to try to spin it to keep your lie going.

WASTED BREATH, 2a. People who are anti-gun are so mainly for one reason: guns SCARE THEM because they know they'd be dangerous in THEIR hands.

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

Very easy answer and you know it. The lower population centers have fewer people therefore, less crime. The higher the concentration of population the higher rate of crime. Simple as that. The lower population centers will, then, require the lower run regulations while the higher population centers will require the higher gun regulations. If you put the higher concentrated population centers to the same lax gun regulation as the low population centers, it would be a friggin blood bath. But you conveniently leave that out. This is why the States will vary in their laws and the inner cities will tighten those laws up to suit their needs. You can spout all this BS if you want but that's the actual answer. Are you sure you aren't part of the new Russian Supported Attacks coming into the US these days they are finding all over the place trying to cause more discord in the US?

Wrong....if that were the case a small city like Baltimore would not have more gun murder than New York City.... it is tiny compared to New York and it has a higher gun murder number...

Notice..... it has a higher gun murder number than L.A. with a vastly larger number of people. Also, Houston.....more people, more guns, in a state with a border on the Narco state of Mexico, and a lower gun murder number.....

You don't know what you are a talking about. It all depends on the criminals in the democrat controlled city and how the police are allowed to arrest them. And as more people are able to carry guns and own guns that helps too.....as Houston shows compared to the other cities on that list...

Murder rate 2017
Baltimore......343
population......620,961
Population of cities 2016:

Chicago........2.7 million
L.A................3.9 million
N.Y................8.5 million
Houston........2.3 million
Baltimore......620,961
Detroit...........672,795
Milwaukee.....595,647

St. Louis.......311,404

Murder rate 2016:

Chicago........765
L.A.......... .....293
N.Y................335
Houston .......301
Baltimore......318
Detroit...........303
Milwaukee.... 142
St. Louis..........188

Baltimore is a small city? By what standard? It's a very large city by any one's standard but yours. At least it was the last time I visited there. Of course, they could have had cardboard mockups of houses, streets, fake cars, people, and more just to confuse me that ran for miles in all directions.

I have a feeling that you are just here to keep the fear going to sell more guns and ammo and nothing more. Screw facts and common sense. The fact remains that low population centers have lower crime rates than high population centers. The more densely populated areas, the crazier things get and the harder it gets to keep crime from going nuts. Therefore, different laws are required. I don't even believe your buddy Rustbucket would disagree with that since He has said about the same thing. We need different gun regulations for different places. One size does not fit all.

If you disagree with this, I can only conclude that you are here for another reason other than wanting to curb murders, accidentals deaths, etc.. You must either be here to sell more ammo through fear by your employer the NRA or are a Russian Operative spreading Discontent with the American Public.

 

[2aguy]

WASTED BREATH, 2a. People who are anti-gun are so mainly for one reason: guns SCARE THEM because they know they'd be dangerous in THEIR hands.

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

Very easy answer and you know it. The lower population centers have fewer people therefore, less crime. The higher the concentration of population the higher rate of crime. Simple as that. The lower population centers will, then, require the lower run regulations while the higher population centers will require the higher gun regulations. If you put the higher concentrated population centers to the same lax gun regulation as the low population centers, it would be a friggin blood bath. But you conveniently leave that out. This is why the States will vary in their laws and the inner cities will tighten those laws up to suit their needs. You can spout all this BS if you want but that's the actual answer. Are you sure you aren't part of the new Russian Supported Attacks coming into the US these days they are finding all over the place trying to cause more discord in the US?

Wrong....if that were the case a small city like Baltimore would not have more gun murder than New York City.... it is tiny compared to New York and it has a higher gun murder number...

Notice..... it has a higher gun murder number than L.A. with a vastly larger number of people. Also, Houston.....more people, more guns, in a state with a border on the Narco state of Mexico, and a lower gun murder number.....

You don't know what you are a talking about. It all depends on the criminals in the democrat controlled city and how the police are allowed to arrest them. And as more people are able to carry guns and own guns that helps too.....as Houston shows compared to the other cities on that list...

Murder rate 2017
Baltimore......343
population......620,961
Population of cities 2016:

Chicago........2.7 million
L.A................3.9 million
N.Y................8.5 million
Houston........2.3 million
Baltimore......620,961
Detroit...........672,795
Milwaukee.....595,647

St. Louis.......311,404

Murder rate 2016:

Chicago........765
L.A.......... .....293
N.Y................335
Houston .......301
Baltimore......318
Detroit...........303
Milwaukee.... 142
St. Louis..........188

Baltimore is a small city? By what standard? It's a very large city by any one's standard but yours. At least it was the last time I visited there. Of course, they could have had cardboard mockups of houses, streets, fake cars, people, and more just to confuse me that ran for miles in all directions.

I have a feeling that you are just here to keep the fear going to sell more guns and ammo and nothing more. Screw facts and common sense. The fact remains that low population centers have lower crime rates than high population centers. The more densely populated areas, the crazier things get and the harder it gets to keep crime from going nuts. Therefore, different laws are required. I don't even believe your buddy Rustbucket would disagree with that since He has said about the same thing. We need different gun regulations for different places. One size does not fit all.

If you disagree with this, I can only conclude that you are here for another reason other than wanting to curb murders, accidentals deaths, etc.. You must either be here to sell more ammo through fear by your employer the NRA or are a Russian Operative spreading Discontent with the American Public.

You said it was the size of the city that created the gun murder issue...I showed you that Baltimore, tiny compared to New York had more gun murders.......dittos for L.A. and other cities....while Houston had fewer gun murders even with more guns in private hands, gun stores on every corner and in a state that borders the Narco State of Mexico...

Murder rate 2017
Baltimore......343
population......620,961
Population of cities 2016:

Chicago........2.7 million
L.A................3.9 million
N.Y................8.5 million
Houston........2.3 million
Baltimore......620,961
Detroit...........672,795
Milwaukee.....595,647

St. Louis.......311,404

Murder rate 2016:

Chicago........765
L.A.......... .....293
N.Y................335
Houston .......301
Baltimore......318
Detroit...........303
Milwaukee.... 142
St. Louis..........188

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Some people are smart enough to see all the problems due to having too many guns. They are many.

And yet you still can't explain why states with lax gun laws have lower murder rates than states with "strong gun control"

Why does NH have the lowest murder rate in the country even though they have very lax gun laws?
WHy does CA have a much higher murder rate than NH despite having some of the strictest gun laws in the country?

Very easy answer and you know it. The lower population centers have fewer people therefore, less crime. The higher the concentration of population the higher rate of crime. Simple as that. The lower population centers will, then, require the lower run regulations while the higher population centers will require the higher gun regulations. If you put the higher concentrated population centers to the same lax gun regulation as the low population centers, it would be a friggin blood bath. But you conveniently leave that out. This is why the States will vary in their laws and the inner cities will tighten those laws up to suit their needs. You can spout all this BS if you want but that's the actual answer. Are you sure you aren't part of the new Russian Supported Attacks coming into the US these days they are finding all over the place trying to cause more discord in the US?

Wrong....if that were the case a small city like Baltimore would not have more gun murder than New York City.... it is tiny compared to New York and it has a higher gun murder number...

Notice..... it has a higher gun murder number than L.A. with a vastly larger number of people. Also, Houston.....more people, more guns, in a state with a border on the Narco state of Mexico, and a lower gun murder number.....

You don't know what you are a talking about. It all depends on the criminals in the democrat controlled city and how the police are allowed to arrest them. And as more people are able to carry guns and own guns that helps too.....as Houston shows compared to the other cities on that list...

Murder rate 2017
Baltimore......343
population......620,961
Population of cities 2016:

Chicago........2.7 million
L.A................3.9 million
N.Y................8.5 million
Houston........2.3 million
Baltimore......620,961
Detroit...........672,795
Milwaukee.....595,647

St. Louis.......311,404

Murder rate 2016:

Chicago........765
L.A.......... .....293
N.Y................335
Houston .......301
Baltimore......318
Detroit...........303
Milwaukee.... 142
St. Louis..........188

Baltimore is a small city? By what standard? It's a very large city by any one's standard but yours. At least it was the last time I visited there. Of course, they could have had cardboard mockups of houses, streets, fake cars, people, and more just to confuse me that ran for miles in all directions.

I have a feeling that you are just here to keep the fear going to sell more guns and ammo and nothing more. Screw facts and common sense. The fact remains that low population centers have lower crime rates than high population centers. The more densely populated areas, the crazier things get and the harder it gets to keep crime from going nuts. Therefore, different laws are required. I don't even believe your buddy Rustbucket would disagree with that since He has said about the same thing. We need different gun regulations for different places. One size does not fit all.

If you disagree with this, I can only conclude that you are here for another reason other than wanting to curb murders, accidentals deaths, etc.. You must either be here to sell more ammo through fear by your employer the NRA or are a Russian Operative spreading Discontent with the American Public.

You said it was the size of the city that created the gun murder issue...I showed you that Baltimore, tiny compared to New York had more gun murders.......dittos for L.A. and other cities....while Houston had fewer gun murders even with more guns in private hands, gun stores on every corner and in a state that borders the Narco State of Mexico...

Murder rate 2017
Baltimore......343
population......620,961
Population of cities 2016:

Chicago........2.7 million
L.A................3.9 million
N.Y................8.5 million
Houston........2.3 million
Baltimore......620,961
Detroit...........672,795
Milwaukee.....595,647

St. Louis.......311,404

Murder rate 2016:

Chicago........765
L.A.......... .....293
N.Y................335
Houston .......301
Baltimore......318
Detroit...........303
Milwaukee.... 142
St. Louis..........188

You showed nothing. Baltimore has the same density as most of NYC has. Only when you consider Manhattan does the density of NYC appear to be higher. I can see you have never been to NYC nor Baltimore. Did your Comradredskis tell you to say this? You are well past the NRA boiler plate. Even they would not make such a bald face claim so I guess there must be only one other answer.